The appearance of the yet unreleased "iBooks 3.0" as a requirement for certain titles in Apple's iBookstore suggests the company will soon update its ebook client app for iOS, likely in conjunction with the release of iPad mini.

According to a report by The Next Web, there is already at least one title in the French iTunes Store specifying iBooks 3.0.

Under the title's "Requirements," which are generated by Apple and not potentially a third party developer's typo, iTunes specifies, "This book requires iBooks 3.0 or later and iOS 4.2 or later. The books can be displayed with iBooks on an iPad, iPhone (3G or later) or iPod touch (2nd generation or later)."

An ebook publisher commented on the report, noting that the iTunes publisher software is indeed listing "iBooks 3.0" as a requirement option.

The news only bolsters rumors that the same site floated last week, indicating that Apple plans to emphasize the new iPad mini as a media-centric device, particularly in regard to iBooks.

This isn't really surprising, given that iBooks is currently the third "built-in app" highlighted by Apple on its iPad website, listed right after Safari and Mail.

But Apple also lists Photos, FaceTime, Maps, Newsstand and Messages in equally large type, and gives secondary mention to its Calendar, Reminders, Contacts, the App Store, iTunes, Music and Videos, Notes, Game Center, Photo Booth, Clock and Camera apps for iPad,

While competing mini tablets from Amazon, Google and others have emphasized ebook reader functionality, they haven't attempted to cover the wide range of other apps Apple provides.

iBooks is, however, an important focus for Apple, particularly in education, an important market for Apple's current tablets and a likely focus for the smaller new iPad mini. With the release of the new iPad earlier this year, Apple also introduced the new iBooks Author, a tool designed to simplify the creation of interactive digital textbooks, as well as an enhanced iBooks 2 for reading them.

Last month, an error reported by Apple TV suggested that Apple also plans to bring iBooks to the living room.

This makes more and more sense. It's unlike Apple to release a new product sub-category without its own identity. I doubt iPadAir or iPad will totally displace e-ink based readers. But for students, a device that can serve as more than a reader is rather compelling. In fact, iBooks and FaceTime together would make this attractive for my kids, if they didn't have iPad already. I wonder if, for reading, the distinction between iPad and iPadAir will be akin to a hardcover vs. a paperback (not in terms of price, of course).

Well with a rumored $329 starting price point there better be something to make this worth the extra $70-$100. Yes, I know people here will tell me the "ecosystem" is easily worth that premium. I guess we'll find out next week,

Yes! This is shaping up to be marketed exactly how I imagined it should be.

It still amazes me that the areas that Apple can't patent are the ones that competitors completely ignore. Where is Google, MS, and Amazon's SW for cornering the digital textbook industry for their tablets?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

Obviously this comes with a new version of iBooks Author, which hopefully will stop taking 980KB text-only Pages documents and turning them into 500MB files.

That's crazy excessive! Let's hope they can figure out some ways to reference images, too, instead of authors using repeat photos having to publish it multiple times.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Well with a rumored $329 starting price point there better be something to make this worth the extra $70-$100. Yes, I know people here will tell me the "ecosystem" is easily worth that premium. I guess we'll find out next week,

Why not focus on the extra $30? We know that psychologically $299 is very attractive compared to anything in the $300 range so why is this thing priced $30 more than one would expect for this "range"? I'm wondering if they fear cannibalization of the flagship iPad so even if they get the same or higher profit ratio they will still be less than the net profit of a more expensive device. They might also have figured that being within a $100 or so of the cheap tablets is enough to affect their sales and pull enough buyers to sell out all their make this season. It's easier to drop a price than to raise it later on.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Okay, now why doesn't iBooks 3.0 have iCloud support with syncing over all devices including Macs? Why can't we Read a page on our iPhone, hop over to our Mac, and continue reading where we left off? Or maybe that will be What they will announce? Otherwise, I don't see much of a point in updating such a large version number.

Okay, now why doesn't iBooks 3.0 have iCloud support with syncing over all devices including Macs? Why can't we Read a page on our iPhone, hop over to our Mac, and continue reading where we left off? Or maybe that will be What they will announce? Otherwise, I don't see much of a point in updating such a large version number.
Dictated using Siri on an iPhone%u2026

Okay, now why doesn't iBooks 3.0 have iCloud support with syncing over all devices including Macs? Why can't we Read a page on our iPhone, hop over to our Mac, and continue reading where we left off? Or maybe that will be What they will announce? Otherwise, I don't see much of a point in updating such a large version number.
Dictated using Siri on an iPhone%u2026

I expect that will come if we have iCloud Tabs in Safari and syncing of notes and bookmarks in iBooks already.

What I'd rather have is the ability for iTunes to sync my tracks and location across the cloud so I can switch between devices without skipping a beat.. <== I just wrote their advertising campaign for them.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Why not focus on the extra $30? We know that psychologically $299 is very attractive compared to anything in the $300 range so why is this thing priced $30 more than one would expect for this "range"? I'm wondering if they fear cannibalization of the flagship iPad so even if they get the same or higher profit ratio they will still be less than the net profit of a more expensive device. They might also have figured that being within a $100 or so of the cheap tablets is enough to affect their sales and pull enough buyers to sell out all their make this season. It's easier to drop a price than to raise it later on.

I'm kind of hoping (probably more wishful thinking) this was an inaccurate leak on purpose. That the real staring price will be $299. But if it is $329 hopefully it will have A6 and in-cell, super thin and light and as close to retina as possible. I've never really had an issue with the higher price so long as it had some amazing specs to go with it, I'm not one who thinks charging a $100 premium for the "ecosystem" will work in this particular market.

Well with a rumored $329 starting price point there better be something to make this worth the extra $70-$100. Yes, I know people here will tell me the "ecosystem" is easily worth that premium. I guess we'll find out next week,

This does sound high, particularly when it is supposed to go as high as $529. But Weintraub has been misled before.

Originally Posted by TeeJay2012
Any chance it will be called iBook Air? At any rate, there is little doubt Apple wants a piece of Amazon, DOJ lawsuits aside.

Not an iBook, not an Air.

So no.

Originally Posted by Rogifan
I guess I should qualify....when I say specs I don't mean speeds and feeds. iPhone 5 might not win based purely on spec sheet but its as good if not better than any other smartphone out there.

But what quantifies "good"? You're not looking to say 'specs' at all; you're meaning to say that the hardware that Apple uses, despite often not being numerically or qualitatively superior to other hardware available within its specific field, is made the best through its integration with the other hardware within the device.

They often don't have near the best specs. But they very often have the subjective (and objective) best—and fastest—product, despite not having specs that would make that seem possible.

I'm kind of hoping (probably more wishful thinking) this was an inaccurate leak on purpose. That the real staring price will be $299. But if it is $329 hopefully it will have A6 and in-cell, super thin and light and as close to retina as possible. I've never really had an issue with the higher price so long as it had some amazing specs to go with it, I'm not one who thinks charging a $100 premium for the "ecosystem" will work in this particular market.

1) I've always wondered about the effectiveness of such tactics. Apple already has the customers that would see this "leak" and it's surely such a small number of users so I can't imagine there will be too many that would think "I was on the fence but now I'm pleasantly surprised by it being $30 lower I think I'll be one." Doesn't mean they don't do that but I'd think they'd do it to help root out who is leaking otherwise sensitive data.

2) I wonder if we should consider some advanced opponents that could account for the higher expected price. New battery tech is where I would want to see some advancement and for a device that I believe needs to focus on being "magically" lightweight I would start there.

PS: Have we ruled out iPad Light as a name? Sounds a lit like a 1980's diet soda. If they call it that then Android fans can claim they are copying Samsung's Galaxy Tab.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

But what quantifies "good"? You're not looking to say 'specs' at all; you're meaning to say that the hardware that Apple uses, despite often not being numerically or qualitatively superior to other hardware available within its specific field, is made the best through its integration with the other hardware within the device.

They often don't have near the best specs. But they very often have the subjective (and objective) best—and fastest—product, despite not having specs that would make that seem possible.

OK ill be specific. I think a shrunken iPad 2 at $329 starting price has FAIL written all over it. If they can't do retina (or something close) then at least have A6, maybe in-cell, super thin and light, great battery life. And then who knows what's coming on the software side.

Well with a rumored $329 starting price point there better be something to make this worth the extra $70-$100. Yes, I know people here will tell me the "ecosystem" is easily worth that premium. I guess we'll find out next week,

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX

Why not focus on the extra $30? We know that psychologically $299 is very attractive compared to anything in the $300 range so why is this thing priced $30 more than one would expect for this "range"? I'm wondering if they fear cannibalization of the flagship iPad so even if they get the same or higher profit ratio they will still be less than the net profit of a more expensive device. They might also have figured that being within a $100 or so of the cheap tablets is enough to affect their sales and pull enough buyers to sell out all their make this season. It's easier to drop a price than to raise it later on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogifan

I'm kind of hoping (probably more wishful thinking) this was an inaccurate leak on purpose. That the real staring price will be $299. But if it is $329 hopefully it will have A6 and in-cell, super thin and light and as close to retina as possible. I've never really had an issue with the higher price so long as it had some amazing specs to go with it, I'm not one who thinks charging a $100 premium for the "ecosystem" will work in this particular market.

Yes, it is possible that $299 is the real price. The $329 leak was only used to test who were the traitors... haha.

Agree with SolipsismX. They probably did their studies and found out that people can stand a $100 premium over Android devices (and still sell out). Yes, easier to drop than to raise.

Apple won't give us crazy-cool hardware and specs with the iPad mini. It's just gonna be standard stuff. Maybe a few tricks in the software. Super light and thin, probably.

OK ill be specific. I think a shrunken iPad 2 at $329 starting price has FAIL written all over it. If they can't do retina (or something close) then at least have A6, maybe in-cell, super thin and light, great battery life. And then who knows what's coming on the software side.

I'm not sure you've stated anything specific because the rumoured device as all signs of having great battery life, being super thin and light already.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

OK ill be specific. I think a shrunken iPad 2 at $329 starting price has FAIL written all over it. If they can't do retina (or something close) then at least have A6, maybe in-cell, super thin and light, great battery life. And then who knows what's coming on the software side.

I would bet on very very long battery life and it being super light and thin. The retina display will be saved for the next update.

It would really be exciting if Apple included something that we could never imagine, like when they did retina with the iPhone 4. Something simple and yet big.

I agree on iBook (i.e. the name not being that) because of confusion with the app, not to mention the fact that they used to have a product called iBook. To me, Air remains a possibility (even though some argue about Air being reserved for the MacBook line). Apple is not fanciful when it comes to names. It will be either iPad Mini or iPad Air. Air will emphasize what appears to be the key design feature - thinness and low weight.

I would bet on very very long battery life and it being super light and thin. The retina display will be saved for the next update.

It would really be exciting if Apple included something that we could never imagine, like when they did retina with the iPhone 4. Something simple and yet big.

I wouldn't think it would be possible until we get the Img Tech Rogue 6 chips and even then the power requirements and costs might still be too high for at least 2014 product, or the 3rd gen iPad "mini".

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

2) I wonder if we should consider some advanced opponents that could account for the higher expected price. New battery tech is where I would want to see some advancement and for a device that I believe needs to focus on being "magically" lightweight I would start there.
PS: Have we ruled out iPad Light as a name? Sounds a lit like a 1980's diet soda. If they call it that then Android fans can claim they are copying Samsung's Galaxy Tab.

You mean component, right? Well, not to beat a dead horse, but Retina Display could account for the price. But, before you treat me like Obama's chair again, I have said all along it was a possibility but not a probability.

As for iPad Light (and the clever Tab pun), it is possible but, as mentioned above, Apple tends to be simple and even repetitively so when it comes to names. I do see them using Air or Mini again rather than Light.

I wouldn't think it would be possible until we get the Img Tech Rogue 6 chips and even then the power requirements and costs might still be too high for at least 2014 product, or the 3rd gen iPad "mini".

Really? Were you referring to the screen? I'm not sure what is IMG TECH ROGUE 6.

If they can't do retina until the 3rd gen, then what can they upgrade in the 2nd gen? (Besides the given's like A6 and RAM)

I see this $329 (rumoured) price tag being wrong. Seems like classic misdirection on Apple's part, in order to make anything below that seem cheaper than expected. I'm expecting $299, but we could see an 8GB $249 version.

I'm not sure you've stated anything specific because the rumoured device as all signs of having great battery life, being super thin and light already.

Well if that's that's the case then it won't be a shrunken iPad 2 right? I'm just going off the speculation it will have iPad 2 or 3GS specs, sell for $100 more than Fire or Nexus and fly off the shelves. That's where I disagree, and I guess where I don't put as high of a premium on the "ecosystem", especially if the focus is on books. How does Apple beat Amazon on books unless their focus will go the interactive route?

I see this $329 (rumoured) price tag being wrong. Seems like classic misdirection on Apple's part, in order to make anything below that seem cheaper than expected. I'm expecting $299, but we could see an 8GB $249 version.

So does this mean I have to re-do my books selling on iTunes using the new iBooks 3.0? Sure hope not as as I was thinking all books on the iPda will work on the new mini iPad...only time will tell...what do you all think...any of you have their books selling for the iPad on iTunes?Edited by dmfett - 10/20/12 at 2:14pm